Eh, unfortunately the one programming breakthrough the world actually needs is one that would drastically change, and perhaps harm, most of the people around here.

We need more "Excels." More and better tools that let "regular" people program.

I'm not going to argue whether the 'world actually needs' that, or if people mostly, actually want that, or if, since excel is already there if you want it, you probably don't have to write, sell or build any more low code tools.

...because, although I could argue about those points, it's fundamentally unrelated to the OP, and issue that programming is hard, and, for a very long time, no one has really had any idea how to solve it.

Now, however, AI generated code (like copilot) is, for the first time in a long time, a potential avenue to actually change how software is created at all levels.

I think there's pretty interesting, because it opens up a lot of new opportunities.

Is the future dynamic languages / high level specifications that are AI-transformed into typed verbose languages like C/Rust/whatever and then compiled?

The ancient tools like Rational Rose tried to do this, but the tech was never actually technically good enough. Maybe... we'll see a real change in this space as the sophistication of the models improves... or maybe, like self-driving cars, it's always going to be 'nearly good enough'.

Hard to say.

...but, hot damn. More excels? Please no. Excel already exists. Don't rebuild that stuff again. Build new, different interesting tools please.

>Is the future dynamic languages / high level specifications that are AI-transformed into typed verbose languages like C/Rust/whatever and then compiled?

How is that different from the present? Why are these "AI-transformations" different from what a compiler can do?

You’ve seen copilot right? (https://github.com/features/copilot)

It’s fundamentally more sophisticated. This is like asking what is the difference between modern ML translation and the previous 20 years of research on language translation; the former actually works.

The latter basically doesn’t except in very specific circumstances.

Compilers can turn language into instructions only in a limited extremely specific set of circumstances.